[Openswan dev] nat-t openswan interop problem Win2003

Jacco de Leeuw jacco2 at dds.nl
Wed Jan 4 19:21:38 CET 2006

Michael Richardson wrote:

>     Jacco> Perhaps they fixed it in Windows 2003 R2 or Vista but I
>     Jacco> haven't tried.  This is how Microsoft works, you pay for new
>     Jacco> features...

Perhaps I wasn't clear but this was meant to be a cynical remark about
Microsoft's upgrade policy. I expect RFC 3947 support to be only in
Vista or possibly Windows 2003 R2. No, I don't like this either.

This situation has happened before: in 2003 Microsoft employees said that
a NAT-T server-side update would be released for Windows 2000 Server, but
later it turned out that only Windows 2003 would support server-side NAT-T.
This was strictly a business decision because they did release a client-side
NAT-T update for Windows 2000 Professional.

> So, who pays us to add work arounds for features that you didn't pay
> us?  It is a serious question.  Why should open source maintainers take
> time away from adding new features to support interoperating with people
> who were too cheap to pay their yearly tithe to microsoft?

I'm not sure what you are getting at.

I reported two issues. The first one was caused by an honest mistake
of the RFC maintainer. Microsoft chose to interpret the MD5 calculation
one way, you chose the other way. There is much to say about Microsoft's
unfair business practices but this is not one of them. The second issue
is an Openswan bug, according to yourself.

I don't know the ins and outs of Openswan's funding. What exactly do you
want people to pay for? What do they get in return? How do you wish to be
paid? Do you want people to buy the book? Is there a Paypal account?
T-shirts to buy? Mugs? You should put this kind of information on your

Jacco de Leeuw                         mailto:jacco2 at dds.nl
Zaandam, The Netherlands           http://www.jacco2.dds.nl
                     Mosquitos suck

More information about the Dev mailing list